Full text of "1943 East Carolina Teachers College Bulletin Prognostic Value of High School Grades"

VOL. 34 DECEMBER, 1943 NO. 4

EAST CAROLINA TEACHERS COLLEGE
BULLETIN

PROGNOSTIC VALUE

HIGH SCHOOL GRADES

GREENVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA

Published four times a year— March. May. August, and December. Bmtered
as second-class matter March if.. L936 at the Posl Offlce at Greenville, N C

under Act ..i I ! 1. 1912.

FOREWORD

This study, "Prognostic Value of High School Grades," is a
discussion of a matter of first rate importance to high schools and
colleges. School administrators are interested in the achieve-
ments of students in high school and also in college. High school
principals are interested in the progress of students after they
leave high school and enter college. This study shows that high
school grades or judgments of principals and teachers are quite
reliable and are indicative of what may be expected in college.

High school grades or marks are not scientifically arrived at in
many instances and yet the data in this study indicate high
reliability of teacher judgment with reference to the abilities of
high school students. It seems to me, however, that adminis-
trators and high school teachers should use standardized tests to
a greater extent in assigning grades and in making recommen-
dations of or statements about pupils who enter college. Each
student should be given at least the following tests :

1. A standardized achievement test.

2. A psychological examination or intelligence test.

3. An aptitudes test.

4. A personality test.

The record of each student should show the results of such
tests and this information should be transmitted to the college
which any student proposes to enter. This means that the
cumulative record of each high school student should show the
results of numerous tests, formal and informal, together with all
other information available in the case of any student.

It has been the custom in some schools for the principals to
recommend students for admission to college. It seems to me
that this is putting too great responsibility upon the principal.
The principal's obligation is to furnish adequate, reliable infor-
mation, all that is available, and it is the college's responsibility
to accept or to fail to accept on the basis of information supplied.
Such study as has been made in "Prognostic Value of High School
Grades," will be very suggestive and helpful to high schools and
colleges and the author is to be commended for his painstaking
study and for a clear statement of the results obtained.

J. Henry Highsmith, Director
Division of Instructional Service
State Department of Public Instruction
Raleigh, North Carolina

PROGNOSTIC VALUE OF HIGH SCHOOL GRADES

Howard J. McGinnis, Registrar
East Carolina Teachers College

Colleges have long set up certain standards of admission to pro-
tect the applicant against the possibility of his wasting his time,
efforts, and talents on a task for which he has little adaptability,
as well as to protect the college against the possibility of wasting
its resources in attempting to instruct those for whom the in-
struction has little value.

The standards of admission to college have varied from time to
time and from college to college. A common standard of ad-
mission has been based on the success of the applicant in his
secondary school studies ; admission has been limited often to
those making a certain average grade in high school studies, or
to those whose grade average gives them a place above a certain
minimum ranking in the high school graduating class.

Colleges justify the setting up of such standards on the grounds
that those responsible for administering the affairs of the college
cannot approve the expenditure of college funds, public or private,
on applicants who give little promise of securing a reasonable
measure of profit from the instruction offered by the college, and
from the experience of citizenship in a college community. One
of the measures of success in college is graduation from the
curricula chosen, but the final measure is the success of the stu-
dent in private and in public life after he has completed his
college work.

While it is probable that any youth of approximately average
intelligence or even one considerably below average in intelligence
might acquire some benefits from a short period of attendance at
a liberal arts college, he will be done an injustice by being ad-
mitted to college if his record of course failures discourages his
seeking further, when he leaves college, a field of activity for
which he is better suited and in which he might have been highly
successful.

If a college wastes twenty-five percent, or even ten percent, of
its resources in attempting i<> instruct those incapable of profiting
adequately from its instruction, it must to that extent reduce the
educational values it has to offer those abundantly able to profll
by its instruction.

[3]

It is not a justifiable excuse for admitting the incapable to say
the college needs greater numbers of students to pad its reports
to trustees and to the public. It is comparable to saying one must
have a new car "to keep up with the Joneses." The American
public wants educational advantages for its youth and real
personal development in terms of his native abilities for each of
its citizens ; it is not satisfied with the mere knowledge that Mary
Jones attended a certain college for a short time and failed so
much of its studies that she was forced to withdraw. The people
who support educational institutions want to know that Mary
Jones went to college ; that she was a worthy and respected mem-
ber of the college community; that she carried her studies with
credit to herself, her parents, her high school and her community,
and that she secured a definite training that makes her a more
valuable citizen than she was before she went to college.

PLAN OF STUDY

During the summer and early fall of 1939 when applications
for admission were being received at East Carolina Teachers
College, it was observed that some of the transcripts of high
school work received carried very low grades. It was decided to
follow the record made in college of a group of these students and
compare their accomplishments with that of a similar number of
students who had made excellent grades in high school.

A total of sixty-one students whose high school grades were
mostly below eighty percent, were selected for the experimental
group. A similar number of students entering at the same time
whose high school grades were mostly above ninety percent were
selected for the control group. The records of the two groups
were followed four full college years, ending with commencement
exercises on May 31, 1943.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Dogmatic generalizations covering the materials in this report
might have been made without going to the trouble of gathering
data — without a definite knowledge of the facts involved. In
fact, a statement to the effect that high school grades are in-
significant or entirely untrustworthy as a basis for determining
what a student is likely to do when he enters college prompted
the study which is being reported here. In order to verify or
disprove that statement, it was decided to follow the work of a
group of students through four years of college.

[4]

The primary purposes of the study were :

(1) To see whether the grades made in high school are indi-
cative of the grades that are likely to be made in a liberal
arts or in a professional college.

(2) To see whether the size and type of high school from which
a student comes determines the quality of success he is
likely to have in college.

(3) To see whether students who make verj r low grades in high
school or those who make high grades in high school are
likely to make the better adjustment in college:

(a) In scholarship.

(b) In tendency to continue in college.

(d) In quality of citizenship shown in college.

In accomplishing these purposes it was found necessary or
expedient to compare the college records of these students in :

(1) Period of college attendance, and graduation.

(2) Course grades, grade points, failures, and credit hours
earned.

(3) Choice of majors.

(4) Honors earned in college, and

(5) Student Government penalties.

PROCEDURES

Sixty-one freshmen entering East Carolina Teachers College in
the fall of 1939, whose high school transcripts showed a majority
of grades in the 70's, were selected for the experimental group.
Sixty-one freshmen entering at the same time, who had made
high grades in high school, that is around 90 or better, were
selected for the control group. These transcripts were selected
by inspection only. The purpose of making the selection in this
manner was to see whether by mere observation of their high
school grades it is possible to forecast with reasonable accuracy,
probable success in college. These students did not know their
records were the object of a special study ; hence, they were under
only the normal stimulation of college students to do good work,
except that the students in the low group, before this study was
planned and before they entered college, had been sent letters
stating that their applications for admission to college had been
received with transcripts of their high school work; that it was
observed their high school grades were rather low; and that it

[5]

seemed they would need to give very careful attention to their
college work if they were to have a reasonable degree of success
in it.

A special mimeographed record form was prepared for each of
the 122 students and data were compiled and compared quarter
by quarter, and year by year.

TECHNIQUES

The technique followed is extremely simple — largely a tabu-
lation and comparison by inspection. It was not deemed profitable
to use the more involved statistical techniques on such a small
number of cases, nor do the data lend themselves to such tech-
niques, except that high school grades could have been correlated
with college grades, but by inspection as indicated by the record
of grade points in tables I and II, the correlation is high.

The tabulation of attendance, credits, grade-points and failures
in tables I and II is intended to give an over-all picture of each
group. Totals for individuals and for each year assist in in-
terpreting and comparing records.

The six other tables are less involved and consequently more
easily interpreted. They present factual data in support of the
several matters under discussion.

GRADING SYSTEM USED

This college uses for its grading system the figures 1, 2, 3, 4,
and 5, in which "1" is the highest grade given, "4" the lowest
passing grade, and "5" is a failing grade. In weighting these
grades to calculate scholarship standing, the following grade-
point values are given for each credit hour carried by the course
on which the grade is made:

Grade "1" — 3 grade points a credit hour

Grade "2"— 2 " " " "

Grade "3"— 1 " " " "

Grade "4"— no " " " "

Grade "5" — 1 " " deducted for the course

Mathematically, this does not give exactly a grade average of
"3" or "C", since only one grade point is deducted for a course
failed. To give a mathematical average of "3" with this plan, it
would be necessary to deduct one grade point for each credit hour
failed, hence the scholarship records of students in this study
who made failures seem to be higher than they actually are in
comparison with students who made no failures on courses.

[6]

Under this plan of grade weighting, a student is considered as
having a grade average of "3" or "C" when he has as many grade
points as he has quarter hours of college credit — but if he has
made failures his actual average will be less than "3" or "C"
when he has a one-to-one ratio of grade-points and credit hours.

RECOMMENDATION FOR COLLEGE ADMISSION

The high school transcript form used by this college has a
space in which the high school, through its proper officers, may
recommend or refuse to recommend its graduates for college
admission.

All of the students in the high group concerned in this study
were recommended for college admission, and fifty-one of those in
the low group were so recommended. On only three of the tran-
scripts was the recommendation definitely "no". Two of those
three students dropped out of college at the end of the first year,
and the third one dropped out at the end of two years of college
work. Each of them did a poor grade of college work. Four of
the transcripts carried no recommendation either way.

On one of the transcripts the principal said the student could
do college work, but at the end of 12 V2 quarters (a half-quarter
more than the normal time required for graduation) that student
had earned only 160 of the 190 quarter hours required for
graduation and had earned about two-thirds of the number of
grade points required to give the necessary scholarship average
for graduation.

On another transcript the superintendent made the notation
that the student was "slow". That student graduated in the
normal time with barely the scholastic average required for
graduation. The student had failed only one course.

On another transcript the superintendent said he had "mis-
givings" about the student's doing college work. That student
remained in the college three years, made five failures, and had a
low scholarship average at the time she dropped out of college.

Still another transcript carried the notation that the student's
attitude rather than his scholarship might be the factor de-
termining whether the student would adjust himself satisfac-
torily in college. That student made no failures in college courses,
and had barely an average in scholarship grades ; he entered the
summer session after four full years of college attendance with
the expectation of graduating, in the extra quarter, at the close
of the summer session 1943.

[7]

HIGH SCHOOLS

The size and the location of high schools from which these
students came seem to have had little to do with their scholarship
in college, and little to do with their adjustment to campus and
community life.

Members of the high group came from 45 different high
schools; members of the low group came from 36 different high
schools. Since most of the students in each group came from
rural or village communities (there are few large cities in eastern
North Carolina from which they might have come), their social
background must have been reasonably similar; their pre-
college educational experience could not have been greatly dis-
similar; and since all except one were residents of North
Carolina, the total number of months of schooling these students
received in the elementary and high schools must have been
practically the same.

Eighteen of these students, five from the low group and thir-
teen from the high group, came from the cities of Wilmington,
Raleigh, Kinston, Greenville, Rocky Mount, Wilson and Washing-
ton. Of the five from the low group only the student from
Washington made an outstandingly high scholarship record.
Each of the thirteen students from the high group had a good
to excellent scholarship record in college.

This leaves 48 members of the high group who came from rural
and, in many instances, small high schools; yet not a single
member of the high group failed to make an entirely satisfactory
scholarship record in college. Not one had less than average
grades in college. The group as a whole earned 1.8 grade points
for each credit hour passed. This would be a little less than the
average grade of "B" in the grading system used by some
colleges — "2" in the grading system used by this college.

The low group, by comparison, earned only 0.81 of a grade
point for each credit hour passed. Two students in the low group,
one from Jacksonville and the other from Willow Springs, were
graduated with scholarship records that would be called good.
Only three of the students from this group who dropped out of
college after a short period of attendance had a scholarship record
in college that was above average.

Generally only one or two students came from any one high
school, but in one instance five and in another six of the low group
came from the same high school, each of which was classified as
a city high school. Two members of the high group came from
the same high school as the six who were in the low group.

[8]

In another instance three of the low group and four of the high
group came from a city high school that is a member of the
Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools.

Here is the record of the three from the low group:

Student No. 17* withdrew during the fall quarter of the fresh-
man year; he returned the second year and had a scholarship
ratio of 10 grade points to 34 credit hours earned with three
failures.

Student No. 54 stayed in college two years and had a scholar-
ship ratio of 38 grade points to 85 credit hours earned and 5
failures.

Student No. 56 attended college two quarters, earned only 12
grade points, 16 credit hours, and made three failures.

The record of the four members of the high group coming from
the same high school is :

Student No. 23** stayed in college one year, earned 82 grade
points and 48 credit hours.

Student No. 28 attended college three regular years and three
summer sessions; he graduated with 288 grade points and 190
credit hours — a superior student.

Student No. 33 stayed in college only one year and earned 71
grade points and 41 credit hours.

Student No. 56 stayed in college one year, earned 110 grade
points and 45 credit hours.

Only eight high schools furnished members of both the high
group and the low group concerned in this study. In four cases
one member of each group came from the same high school.

In another instance one of the low group and two of the high
group came from the same high school.

In another, two from the low and one from the high group.

In another instance, three from the low group and four from
the high group. Their record is given above.

In another, six from the low group and two from the high
group.

In all, 16 from the low group and 13 from the high group came
from the eight high schools.

In every case the student with the good grades in high school
made good to excellent grades in college, and the students with
poor grades in high school, except four, made poor or below
average grades in college. Those four graduated with barely
average grades, and two of them took an extra quarter to meet
graduation requirements.

♦See Table II.
**See Table I.

[0]

The scholarship ratio of the 13 members of the high group
that came from these eight high schools was 3,266 grade points
earned to 1,888 credit hours earned, which is nearly a "2" or "B"
average.

The scholarship ratio for the 16 members of the low group
that came from the same eight schools was 1,179 grade points
earned to 1,571 credit hours earned. This is much below a "3"
average.

It is seen that 13 members of the high group made nearly
three times as many grade points and one-fifth more credit hours
than did the 16 members of the low group who received their
training in the same high schools and at the same time.

The facts given above indicate that the length of school term
in his pre-college education did not determine the student's
scholarship rank in college.

SCHOLARSHIP

The scholarship record of the high, or control, group showing
the grade points, credit hours, and number of failures made year
by year, and the totals, is found in Table I. Forty-seven members
of this group were in college during the fourth year and 41 of
them were graduated with the Bachelor's degree by the end of
the fourth year. Two of them, students Nos. 13 and 28, were
graduated in three years. This was accomplished by their at-
tending summer sessions. Two more of them are scheduled to
be graduated at the end of the summer session, 1943.

It should be explained that in this table, summer session credits
were carried over and recorded in the space reserved for the
fourth year's credits. This was done in order to keep intact the
credits earned respectively in the first, second and third regular
college years.

It will be observed that in the four years, these 61 students had
only 32 individual course failures and that the average grade was
2.25, which is % of a grade point better than an average of "3" ;
or 14 of a grade point under a grade of "2" according to the
grading system of this college ; or a little under an average grade
of "B", according to the system used by some other colleges. Not
a single individual in this group made less than average grades
as a whole during his college attendance. It is striking that so
large percentage of this group continued in college for the full
four years. The percentage is considerably higher than that for
the general enrollment in this college, which is approximately
50%; that is, approximately 50% of those who enter, continue
through to graduation.

[10]

The highest number of failures made by this group was during
the third year; the lowest number was during the second year.
The largest number of withdrawals from this group was at the
end of the freshman year when nine of them gave up college
work here; five withdrew at the end of the second year; three
withdrew at the end of the third year. Three of those who with-
drew from college returned later to continue their college work.

Even a casual comparison of Table I and Table II shows very
definitely that the members of the low group had a much smaller
total amount of time in college attendance than the high group
and that its total scholarship as well as its individual scholarship
was very much lower than that of the high group.

Under a strict mathematical application of the grading system
adopted by this college, the lower group earned only 0.58 of a
grade point for each credit hour attempted; that is, for each
credit hour included on the student's course schedule at the
beginning of the quarter.

If, as is the practice in this college, the student is charged with
a reduction of only one grade point for each failure, this group
then could be said to have earned 0.65 of a grade point for each
credit hour attempted.

Again, deducting only one grade point for each course failure
and basing the calculation on the number of credit hours earned,
this group can be said to have earned 0.81 of a grade point for
each credit hour actually earned by his securing at least a pass-
ing grade on the course.

Thus, it is seen that by each one of these plans of calculation,
this group made much less than average grades on the college
work scheduled and on the college work passed as well.

Only eleven of the group made better than mathematically
average grades — one had exactly a mathematical average ; and of
the eleven, only eight were enrolled in the college after the third
year. Three of the group made praiseworthy scholastic records:
that is, students nos. 8, 35, and 50. Student No. 35 graduated
in three years by attending summer sessions and made a grade
point-credit hour ratio of 396 to 190.

The question naturally arises, "Why should a student who
made a very poor scholastic record in high school make such a
high scholastic record in college?" During the freshman year it
was observed that this student was making unusually good marks
and a conference was held with him to get an explanation. He
stated very simply that he was not interested in attending high
school and did so only because it was expected of him (from

[11]

TABLE I. GRADE POINTS, CREDIT HOURS AND FAILURES
HIGH GROUP

STUDENT

First Year

Second Year

Third Year

Fourth Year

Total

NUMBER

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

I**

107

138

119

424

190

113

393

192

225

184

114

112

365

192

151

144

279

195

258

196

223

193

96
84

48
4S

87
86

183
206

90
112

11*

307

194

105

197

13*"

103

110

365

193

14*

305

194

15*

103

391

191

16*

201

194

17**

119

109

119

129

476

212

18*

251

193

19*

322

190

20*

103

129

112

434

195

21*

110

142

113

452

190

104
82
79

48
48

104

299

51
48
190

24*

25*

116

396

194

48
105

48
445

22
192

27*

117

129

28*

114

288

190

29**

106

329

192

168

213

128

32*

324

190

71
104

71
348

41
190

34*

35**

314

193

36*

153

132

116

112

513

196

37*

313

192

[12]

STUDENT

First Year

Second Year

Third Year

Fourth Year

Total

NUMBER

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

38
94

29
48

38
288

29
175

40*

284

190

41*

116

117

425

199

42*

115

111

375

194

43*

101

365

190

75
304

49
190

45*

148
68

87
91

39
49

235
338

89
196

47**

48*

236

192

49*

282

195

50*

304

195

81
101

47
47

81
371

47
190

52*

103

53*

222

191

135

161
101

52
50

296
337

101
198

55*

110
96

110
353

199

57**

101

58*

288

190

220

154

60*

117

101

367

192

6fl

Totals

5,472

2,875

4,689

2,606

3,608

2,216

3,257

2.068

16,926

0,666

* Graduated with Baehclor's'degree.'May 31. 1943.
** Graduated with Bachelor's degree, March, 1943.
•** Graduated with Bachelor's degree in three years by attending summer sessions.

[13]

TABLE II. GRADE POINTS, CREDIT HOURS AND FAILURES
LOW GROUP

STUDENT

First Year

Second Year

Third Year

Fourth Year

Total

NUMBER

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

28
23

1
-1
46
48
55
-2
-5
17

7
51
33
10
30

39
36
45
37
35
45
45
48
28
40
27
28
42
43
45
42

4
2
2
4
4

4
7
2
3

1
4
4

129

138

14
57
170
259
_2
-5
29
7

51
33
10
31
10
1

-4

167

109

122

86
25
396
23
113

151

169

137

191

124

173

158

173

153

190

133

2
3
4

33
31

51
46

47
18

21
66

19
32

8
4

15
11
81
85

38
14
48
51

41
75

44
47

8*
9

1
10

12
34

2
3

14
37
-4
-4
12
22
33
13
44

4
12
44

9
19

9
121
23
26

43
47
39
16
43
45
44
31
44
42
39
38
49
38
38
40
54
41
41

2
4
1
8
4
2

1
2

4
3
2

4
2
4

5
2

32
18
23

31
33
35

3
3

45
33
19

48
42
39

3
4

25
26
27

83
54

54
53

1
1

8
10

31
32

4
4

33
34

110

34
46
49

2
5

8
9

35t

105

[14]

STUDENT

First Year

Second Year

Third Year

Fourth Year

Total

NUMBER

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's
2

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

137

15
87

1
6

189

178

42*

155

183

46
194

44*

202

170

188

43
45

47
46

36
49

4
1

99
203

135
200

48*

8
59

16
48

8
262

16
194

50*

3
22

1
27
41

16
45
31
45

2
5
2
3

102

16
45
31
85
170

5
2

40
35

2
3

12
40

12
189

16
192

57*

13
52
42

48
48

13
52

202

16
48
190

60*

190

187

Totals

1,402

2,344

125

1,174

1,313

956

1,053

1,010

861

4,542

5,571

* Graduated with Bachelor's degree, May 31, 1943.
** Graduated with Bachelor's degree, March, 1943.
t Graduated with Bachelor's degree in three years by attending summer sessions.

SUMMARY OF SCHOLARSHIP AND CREDITS EARNED

BTl HINT

First J

Second V. ■ ir

Third

Poortl

CROUP

Pts.

Hrs.

5's

PU.

5's

il.

5's

ffigb

2,875

4,589

2,506

3,608

2,068

Low

1,402

2,344

125

1,171

1,818

1,010

[15]

which we may gather that there was at least minor compulsion) ,
but that in college he had a very definite goal in mind, something
very definite to work for, and that, as a consequence, he was
giving his very best efforts to his college work. This student was
somewhat above the usual age for college admission. In fact,
two or three years had elapsed after he graduated from high
school before he entered college.

With most of the students in the low group, it seems evident
they were working as nearly up to their capacity as most students
do, for there was little improvement in their scholarship ratio;
for example, student No. 33 had a scholarship ratio the first year
of 19 to 38; in the fourth year, he had a scholarship ratio of 27
to 39; his total scholarship ratio for the four years was 86 to
153, with a total of eight failures. Again student No. 38 had a
scholarship ratio the first year of 10 to 39, the fourth year of
27 to 46, and a total scholarship ratio of 71 to 137 for the four
years, with nine failures. Student No. 61 had a scholarship ratio
the first year of 33 to 48. This was raised a bit during the
sophomore and junior years, but it dropped back during the
senior year to 43-46 ; it was only a small fraction above average,
that is 190 to 187 at the end of the four years. This student is .
attempting to complete the requirements for graduation by at-
tending a summer session at the end of the four years.

TOTAL COLLEGE ATTENDANCE

A casual inspection and a comparison of Tables I and II indi-
cate at a glance that the high group persisted in college
attendance to a greater extent than did the low group. That fact
is emphasized more definitely in the figures given below. Since
this college operates on the quarter plan, and since there were 61
students in each group, if all members of each group had attended
the full time, each group would have had a total attendance
record of 183 student quarters a year. During the freshman
year the high group had a total of 180, or three student quarters
under the maximum possible in college attendance. The low
group, on the other hand, had only 161 student quarters in
attendance, or 22 student quarters under the maximum possible.
There was a more drastic reduction in the number of student
quarters of attendance during the second year for each group,
but the greater reduction was in the low group.

[16]

TABLE

Possible

Actual

Student
Quarters

High Group

Low Group

Student
Quarters

Percent

Student
Quarters

Percent

1st year

183

180

98.4

161

2nd year

183

154

84.2

49.2

3rd year

183

138

75.4

38.8

4th year

183

131

31.7

Total

732

603

82.4

381

52.05

NOTE: 61 (Students) x 3 (Quarters) = 183 possible student quarters of attendance a year x 4 (Years)
student quarters of attendance in four years.

732 possible

During the senior or fourth year, the high group made a total
of 131 student quarters in attendance, or 52 student quarters
short of the maximum possible. On the other hand, during that
year, the low group made only a total of 58 student quarters in
attendance, which was 125 student quarters short of the maxi-
mum possible.

For the full four years, the high group had a total of 603
student quarters in attendance, which was 82.4% of the 732
maximum student quarters of attendance possible. The low
group, on the other hand, had only 381 student quarters in at-
tendance for the four years, which was 52.05% of the total
attendance possible. Table III breaks down student quarters of
attendance by years for each group.

GRADUATION

Two members of the high group were graduated in June 1942,
which was only three calendar years from the time of their ad-
mission to college, but by taking summer sessions, they made up
the extra three quarters and were graduated in the usual twelve
quarters. Six shortened their graduation by one quarter and
graduated in March 1943 by attending a full summer quarter.
Thirty-three were graduated in June 1943 after having attended
twelve regular quarters. Two more were graduated in August
1943, one because of some irregularity in her schedule that
necessitated her taking an extra quarter, and the other because
of her desire to take particular elective courses to add to her
equipment as a college graduate. Thus 41 (67.2%) of the high
group were graduated by the end of the four normal college years

[17]

required for graduation, and two more, making a total of 43 of
the 61 in this group, were graduated by August 1943. It is quite
certain that one other student who dropped out of college for a
year will return to graduate next year, and is it probable that
another who dropped out during the college year 1942-43 will
return to complete the requirements for graduation. If they do,
that will make a total of 45 (73.7%) of this group to graduate.

In the low group, one was graduated in March 1942, having
taken eleven quarters to complete the requirements for gradua-
tion, and seven were graduated in June 1943, but five of the seven
had found it necessary to attend one or more summer sessions to
do so. Thus eight (13.1%) were graduated within four calendar
years, but only 3 (5%) met the requirements for graduation
within the normal twelve quarters. Four more were graduated in
August 1943 after taking 121/0 to 14 quarters to do so. A total
of twelve (19.6%) of the 61 members of the low group were
graduated by August 1943. There is little probability that any
other members of this group can or will meet the graduation
requirements.

As to the time required to graduate, in the high group one took
111/^2 quarters; 37 took 12 quarters; one took 12i/ 2 quarters; and
two stayed in college 13 quarters. In the low group, one grad-
uated in 11 quarters; 2 in 12 quarters; 6 took 121/2 quarters;
2 in 13 quarters and 1 in 14 quarters. One other member of the
low group has already been in college 13 V2 quarters and another,
14 quarters. There seems little prospect that these last two
students will meet graduation requirements.

WITHDRAWALS FROM COLLEGE

The difference in the number of withdrawals from college by
members of the two groups was apparent from the time of their
admission in the fall quarter 1939. Many more members of the
low group withdrew from college than was the case with the
membership in the high group. This can be readily seen by an in-
spection and comparison of Tables I and II. In the fourth year
only 17 members of the low group still remained in college, while
43 members of the high group were still in college.

An inquiry was addressed during the spring of 1943 to all
students under consideration in this study who had dropped out
of college, asking their reasons for dropping out of college.

Replies were received from 38 ; 22 did not reply. The reasons
given are indicated below under the number given the student
in this study. Seven replied that they entered business school,

[18]

leaving the impression, or attempting to leave the impression,
that this was the reason for dropping out of college. Six of these
were in the low group. Whether they entered business school
immediately after withdrawing from this college is not apparent.

Of those who did not reply from the low group, at least one
failed to pass the required number of credit hours to return and
each of the others was making a very low scholastic record.

Of the members of the high group who withdrew from this
college, at least six entered othei academic and professional
colleges. Two entered business schools; two secured secretarial
jobs later, and four reported that they had married.

Seven of the low group and four of the high group left college
to get married or did so before the end of the period covered by
this study. It is probable that there was some evasion and that
the real reason for the withdrawal was not, in all cases, correctly
given.

The reasons most frequently given were :

TABLE IV

Did not have enough money 9

Did not like college work 1

Had a poor foundation in high school 1

Did not like this college 1

Personal illness 2

Got married 6

Entered another college __,. 3

Entered business school 7

Voice handicap 1

Discouraged by failures 1

Got a secretarial job 3

Entered armed forces 3

WHY STUDENTS LEAVE COLLEGE

TABLE V

Student

No. LOW GROUP

4 Got married

6 Sick

7 Voice handicap not suitable to teaching; going to business college

13 Not enough money

14 Entered business school

15 Got married; did not like college; poor high school foundation

17 Entered a small college

18 Not agreeable roommate assignment; got married

19 Entered business school; not enough money; got married

20 Entered military service
23 Got married

[19]

24 Sickness, personal; not employed; planning to get work

27 Got a secretarial job; got married; still working

28 Not enough money; poor high school foundation; working in

dentist's office

30 Entered commercial school; secured secretarial employment

32 Not enough money; poor high school foundation; went to business

school; has secretarial job
3 6 Entered business school; has secretarial job

37 Entered military service

38 Sickness; appendicitis

40 Not enough money; poor high school foundation; working defense

job

41 Not enough money; in training for nursing

46 Withdrew temporarily and returned to E. C. T. C.

47 Disgruntled at a teacher who had given a failure

53 Discouraged at failures; got married

54 Entered military service

58 Got a job

59 Not enough money; in training for nursing

HIGH GROUP

5 Got married

9 Not enough money; entered Air Corps

10 Got married to man in military service

12 Entered business school; has secretarial job

22 Not enough money

31 Got married; now unemployed

33 Entered engineering school
38 Entered engineering school
46 Got married

54 Entered medical school; now medical technologist

5 6 Entered military service

61 Secured secretarial job

STUDENT MAJORS

A check was made of the major fields of study elected by the
122 students concerned in this study to see whether there was a
tendency for a student to be influenced in the selection of his
major by his own estimation of his personal characteristics and
abilities with special reference to the quality of his scholarship in
high school. The tabulation below gives the major fields chosen
by these students.

There was a tendency for students of the low group to elect
majors in which a considerable amount of manual skill is em-
ployed, and a tendency for the members of the high group con-
versely to choose a major field in which a high degree of academic
scholarship is needed.

It is noticeable that nearly twice as many of the low group
chose the primary curriculum as there were members of the high

[20]

group electing this field of preparation, and nearly twice as many
members of the high group chose the grammar grade as did
members of the low group. More than three times as many of
the high group chose mathematics as did those in the low group ;
more than four times as many chose English. This seems to
indicate that the members of each group had some knowledge of
their own capabilities and that they chose their majors accord-
ingly. Except in the fields of primary and grammar grade edu-
cation, students in this college usually elect two majors, hence
in the tabulation below these double majors are included.

TABLE VI. CHOICE OF MAJORS

High Low

Commerce 13 19

Physical Education 2 6

Home Economics 11 14

Primary 7 13

Grammar 11 6

English 13 3

Mathematics 10 3

History 8 4

Science 12 11

SUMMER SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

Members of both the low and the high groups attended summer
school in several instances ; however, members of the high group
seem to have a better reason for summer school attendance than
the low group. Several members of the high group attended
summer sessions in order to hasten graduation; two of them
hastening it by a full year; some hastened graduation by two
quarters, and others hastened it by one quarter.

One member of the high group attended summer school merely
to get certain courses in which she was interested and to secure
the additional training. Another of the high group attended an
extra quarter for this purpose.

It seems manifest that most of those in the low group who
attended summer sessions did so in the hope that they might
improve their grade standing and thus justify their attendance in
college. A further purpose in their attending the summer session
was to accumulate the credit hours needed to keep up with their
classmates since by failures and by being required to take lighter
schedules, they were falling behind in the total number of credit
hours required to qualify for the advanced classification.

[21]

One member of the low group was graduated in three years and
three summer sessions. This was student No. 35, an unusual
case, which has been mentioned previously in this report.

CLASS HONORS AND CLUB MEMBERSHIPS

Members of the high group secured many more honors by way
of class offices and positions of responsibility than did members
of the low group. The high group likewise had a larger repre-
sentation in club memberships as shown in Table VII. Only one
member of the low group held any official position in a class or
group ; that was the position as club secretary-treasurer. Thirty-
nine members of the high group held such offices ; one as class
president, another as class vice-president, 12 as club presidents,
and 12 as club vice-presidents. Nearly three times as many of
the high group as of the low group were members of the Young
Women's Christian Association. Twelve members of the high
group were chosen for the honor of Who's Who in Colleges, but
no member of the low group was given this honor.

TABLE VII. CLASS HONORS AND CLUB MEMBERSHIPS

High Low

Class president 1 —

Class vice-president 1

Class secretary 1

Club president 12

Club vice-president 13

Club secretary-treasurer 11 1

Dormitory proctor 3 1

Y. W. C. A. members 30 11

"Y" Cabinet 3

Student Government Association 11

Publications Board 1

Marshal 5

Senior Superlative 4

Who's Who in College 12

Tecoan Staff 4 1

Reporter, College Paper 4

Editor, College Paper 1

Club memberships 111 39

Totals 225 53

STUDENT GOVERNMENT PENALTIES

One measure of a student's citizenship in the college com-
munity is the record of his appearance before the Student
Government Council, when called before that body on some

[22]

charge of misconduct or infraction of regulations, and of the
penalties inflicted on him. This is a negative significant measure.
The most common infraction, for which penalties are imposed,
is returning to the campus and signing in after the time set for
the return. Slight tardiness or tardiness with good excuse is a
minor infraction.

The comparative record of the two groups of students under
consideration with respect to penalties imposed is found in Table
VIII where, it will be observed, 19 individuals of the high group
received during the four years a total of 26 penalties ; 17 of these
were minor infractions entailing a restriction of privileges for a
period of one week or less. In only seven instances did members
of this group receive a penalty restriction of as much as three
weeks. In the low group during the four years, 20 individuals
received a total of 50 penalty restrictions, of which 22 were for
periods of one week or less. Eight of the 50 were rather severe
penalties, ranging from a one-month restriction of privileges to
suspension.

The comparison is more striking when it is explained that the
larger number of withdrawals from college were from the low
group and that this group had only approximately five-eighths as
much total attendance time in college as the high group. There
seems to have been a definite tendency for students of low scholar-
ship to offend more frequently against college regulations and
against principles of good college citizenship.

Practically all penalties are imposed by the Student Council
which is the governing body elected by the students themselves.

TABLE VIII. STUDENT GOVERNMENT PENALTIES

ruction: High Gbouf LowGrotjj

(19 individuals » (20 individuals)

Warning 1 1

Less than one week 1 2

One week 16 20

LOdaya 1 6

2 weeks — 4

:: weeks 7 9

One month — 1

One quarter 1

Indefinite — 1

Probation — 1

Suspended — 1

Totals 26 50

[23]

SUMMARY

The difference in the accomplishment of the members of the
two groups was apparent from the first quarter of their college
attendance.

For example, the low group failed 125 different courses during
the first year while the high group failed only four. The low
group failed 222 courses during the four years while the high
group failed only 32.

It seems highly significant also that the high group had a
scholastic ratio of 5,472 grade points earned to 2,875 credit hours
earned in the freshman year, while the low group had a scholar-
ship ratio of 1,402 grade points earned and 2,344 credit hours
earned in that year.

Comparable accomplishment for the second year was 4,589
grade points to 2,506 credit hours earned by the high group and
1,174 grade points earned to 1,313 credit hours for the low group.

While there was some improvement by the low group, as might
be expected, only a small number of the low group made better
than average grades.

Of the 17 members of the low group enrolled in college during
the fourth year only seven had average scholarship grades or
better. Five of the seven had barely average grades. One of
this group graduated in three years.

Of the 43 members of the high group in college during the
fourth year, all had better than average grades ; one had slightly
above average grades ; all others had good to excellent grades.

The high group excelled in honors attained and had a better
citizenship record.

There was a tendency for members of the high group to select
the traditional academic majors such as English, history, mathe-
matics ; and members of the low group to select majors that are
thought to call more strongly on manual skills; there was a
tendency, among those electing elementary school teaching, for
good students to elect the grammar curriculum and poor students
to select the primary curriculum.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The results of this study indicate that the grades given in
North Carolina high schools are comparable to the grades
given at East Carolina Teachers College to students of similar
ability and similar accomplishment.

[24]

2. High school grades are highly significant of the type of ac-
complishment the student is likely to achieve if he attends a
liberal arts or professional college.

3. Students who have a high grade average in high school are
quite certain to carry college work successfully and according
to the results of this study, they are six times as likely to
graduate from college as those with a very low grade average
in high school.

4. There are only two chances in 62 or one chance in 31 that the
student with very low grades in high school will make out-
standing grades in college; about an even chance, that is, 27
in 62, that he will stay in college only one year; about one
chance in nine that he will graduate in the normal time ; about
one chance in seven that he will graduate at all.

5. Students who enter an academic or professional college after
having made a very low grade average in high school are
likely to:

(a) Drop out of college before graduation

(b) Make less than average grades to very poor grades

(d) Make a relatively poor adjustment to college life and to
college regulations

(e) Waste time in attempting tasks that are beyond their
capabilities or for which they are ill-suited.

6. Recommendations for admission to college are often given
inadvisedly by high school principals and superintendents to
students who have small chance of doing successful college
work.

7. A college assumes a heavy burden in admitting and attempt-
ing to instruct students who are not adapted to the curricula
and the type of learning it has to offer.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. High schools should give more careful vocational counselling
to members of their graduating classes who contemplate at-
tending college. These students should be made aware of
their native abilities, their personal limitations, and their best
probable choice of vocation.

2. High school seniors should not be recommended for admission
to a type of training (or college) in which they have small
chance of achieving at least fair success.

[25]

3. Colleges should set up procedures, such as intelligence,
achievement, vocational, personality, and academic tests,
coupled with personal conferences to determine eligibility for
admission to the curriculum and the type of training each has
to offer.

4. No prospective student should be admitted until the college
has assured itself that the applicant is capable, from every
standpoint, of taking the training it has to offer and of getting
value received for the time, money, and effort given while
attending the college, and that he has a reasonable prospect
of completing the course of study contemplated.

5. When a student is admitted to a college he should be given
such encouragement, stimulation and direction as to encourage
his best accomplishment in the course of training undertaken ;
he should not be looked upon as just another measure of grist
in the mill.

[26

FOR REFERENCE

Oo Not Take From This Room